Appeal No. 2004-2153
Application No. 09/923,510
Accordingly, the decision of the examiner to reject claims
9, 10, 12 through 14 and 22 through 25 of the present application
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is reversed.
In addition to the foregoing, we REMAND this application to
the examiner for a decision on the record as to whether or not a
rejection of any of claims 9, 10, 12 through 14 and 22 through 25
would be appropriate based on a somewhat different consideration
of the combined teachings of Willebrand and Reichman. More
specifically, we point the examiner to the disclosure in
Willebrand (e.g., columns 12-15) regarding the use of a separate
wavelength for transmitting network status, control, and
management information over free-space links (24) and,
particularly, the disclosure at column 13, line 65 through column
15, line 10. We first ask the examiner to consider whether the
disclosure at column 13, line 65 through column 14, line 25 of
Willebrand (wherein unique identifiers for the various head
stations and separate addressing of each link head station are
discussed in the context of status, control, and management
information communication) actually suggests the use of data
packets and control packets time division multiplexed into a
-8-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007